Enforcement of this Act by the Painter-Stainers Company was sought up until the early 19th century, with master painters gathering irregularly to decide the fees that a journeyman could charge, and also instigating an early version of a job centre in 1769, advertising in the London newspapers a "house of call" system to advertise for journeymen and also for journeymen to advertise for work. The guild's power in setting the fee a journeyman could charge was eventually overturned by law in 1827, and the period after this saw the guild's power diminish, along with that of the other guilds; the guilds were superseded by trade unions, with the Operative United Painters' Union forming sometime around 1831.[2]
In England, little is known of the trade and its structures before the late 13th century, at which paint guilds began to form, amongst them the Painters Company and the Stainers Company. These two guilds eventually merged with the consent of the Lord Mayor of the City of London in 1502, forming the Worshipful Company of Painter-Stainers. The guild standardised the craft and acted as a protector of the trade secrets. In 1599, the guild asked Parliament for protection, which was eventually granted in a bill of 1606, which granted the trade protection from outside competition such as plasterers.[2]
In a previous article, we discussed how to use the strategy pattern to dynamically change an object’s behavior at runtime. Classically, polymorphism in object-oriented design is static and achieved through inheritance; however, with the strategy pattern you can accomplish the same goal dynamically. Indeed, this is an excellent way to handle situations when you need an object to exhibit different behavior at different times. However, it’s worth noting that the strategy pattern requires mutation of the object you’re working with. By using the strategy pattern, you are necessarily changing the algorithm that an object uses for a given behavior. In some situations, it may be preferable not to mutate a given object. Or more likely, you won’t even have the option of mutating an object because it may come from a codebase over which you have no control (such as an external library). Such cases are relatively common; however, it’s still possible to enhance an immutable object’s behavior. One effective means to do so is with the decorator pattern.

Writing a class decorator is very similar to writing a function decorator. The only difference is that the decorator will receive a class and not a function as an argument. In fact, all the decorators you saw above will work as class decorators. When you are using them on a class instead of a function, their effect might not be what you want. In the following example, the @timer decorator is applied to a class:
Concrete Decorator: Here we have two concrete decorators, ExcitedMessageDecorator and QuizzicalMessageDecorator, each of which descends from the abstract MessageDecorator class. However, these decorators do have special behavior in that they override the GetMessage and PrintMessage behaviors and enhance them by calling the base version from MessageDecorator (which in turn delegates to the relevant IMessage object) and then appending exclamations.
Here we ensure that the key student_id is part of the request. Although this validation works, it really does not belong in the function itself. Plus, perhaps there are other routes that use the exact same validation. So, let’s keep it DRY and abstract out any unnecessary logic with a decorator. The following @validate_json decorator will do the job:
This difference becomes most important when there are several independent ways of extending functionality. In some object-oriented programming languages, classes cannot be created at runtime, and it is typically not possible to predict, at design time, what combinations of extensions will be needed. This would mean that a new class would have to be made for every possible combination. By contrast, decorators are objects, created at runtime, and can be combined on a per-use basis. The I/O Streams implementations of both Java and the .NET Framework incorporate the decorator pattern.
Abstract painting uses a visual language of form, colour and line to create a composition that may exist with a degree of independence from visual references in the world.[29][30] Abstract expressionism was an American post-World War II art movement that combined the emotional intensity and self-denial of the German Expressionists with the anti-figurative aesthetic of the European abstract schools—such as Futurism, Bauhaus and Cubism, and the image of being rebellious, anarchic, highly idiosyncratic and, some feel, nihilistic.[31]
Moreover, the use of language is only an abstraction for a color equivalent. The word "red", for example, can cover a wide range of variations from the pure red of the visible spectrum of light. There is not a formalized register of different colors in the way that there is agreement on different notes in music, such as F or C♯. For a painter, color is not simply divided into basic (primary) and derived (complementary or mixed) colors (like red, blue, green, brown, etc.).